Kathmandu: The UML leader, Madhav Nepal, is not a spent force as some would think of him.

Madhav Nepal has gained experience over the years on how to impose his personal views into the minds of his friends and foes alike inside the party that he heads at the moment.

And in effect this he did at the ongoing Central Committee meeting of the party that began Monday.

Sources close to the UML say that though Madhav Nepal succeeded in his bid to assuage the agitating colleagues demanding the party to quit the government at the earliest by pushing self-framed analyses. His detractors finally had to tone down their verbal attacks on the government as the order came from their own party-boss, Madhav Nepal.

Mr. Nepal’s detractors in the party had to gulp the bitter pill provided them by Party’s all-powerful General Secretary.

However, what became evident is that Madhav Nepal has now many enemies inside the party who summarily differ with Mr. Nepal’s presumptions (an unusual phenomenon in the party of the dogmatic communists) and that the number of his detractors was increasing with each and every mistakes committed either by the government in general or by the ministers from the UML quota in particular.

For the time being, the GS of the party made it abundantly clear that the UML would in no way quit the government come what may.

How the UML leaders differing with Mr. Nepal’s views and the party’s affiliated organs would take this pill will have to be carefully watched.

However, Mr. Nepal made his own observations in not quitting the government as demanded by some leaders of his own party.

Firstly, Madhav Nepal says that if the UML quits the Deuba establishment, it would enhance “regression”. In saying so Madhav Nepal presumes or even concludes that “regression” was still in force and that the UML’s being in the government has at best not allowed regression to expand or has restricted regression to a limit. But then the fact is that the UML leader does admit that regression continues to exist immaterial of the UML being in power. Honest assertion indeed.

To recall, the UML while joining the government had reiterated that regression would come to a halt the moment the UML joined the Deuba government.

Yet another point Madhav Nepal reiterated in the CC meet Monday.

He says that since there was no suitable alternative to Deuba government at this critical juncture and thus Deuba’s resignation should not be made an issue. Should this mean that Deuba should be allowed to continue for an indefinite period even if he fails in bringing the Maoists to the table and restore peace in the country?

In Madhav’s views, perhaps yes! But why he says so?

The UML leader himself provides a clue to his presumption. He says that he has received indications that the King was pressing Deuba hard to resign. In his analysis, if Deuba is told to resign or is sacked as in the past might create a political vacuum that would allow enough space to the King and the latter might rush to fill the vacuum by acquiring a different political posture which in his views would be more dangerous.

Is it this presumed fear that the UML prefers to continue in the government for an indefinite period or possesses a penchant to be in the government for some other political reasons? Or is it a sort of message to Deuba that he needed the UML’s support to survive?

Madhav Nepal knows it better.

The third point that the UML leader reiterated Monday at the CC meet was that he was some time back suggested by the Maoists to quit the government and come to the streets. Mr. Nepal says that he declined to comply with the Maoists fervent appeal.

Analyzing all these what comes to the fore is that the UML concludes that regression was still in force and that Deuba’s ouster from the government might open the Pandora’s box and that he was in close contact with the Maoist leaders. What is also evident from his analysis is that the UML will not quit the government for a variety of reasons. What also could be drawn from Madhav’s analysis is that the UML is not that far from the streets where it could join again its old street partners should circumstances force the party.

The essence of the UML leaders’ assertion is that till the UML was in the government, Deuba was safe.

Analysts opine that Deuba could be safe with the UML participation in government but that could not be a guarantee for his longevity.

Analysts maintain that politics might take a different turn after King Gyanendra returns from his Delhi trip

How Madhav Nepal will interpret his own structured views in case Deuba is sacked after the Delhi trip?